2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election

[adma]

Or they just supported PP because as the 'consensus candidate' it was his race to lose. Same with the PC types from further up. Like there comes a point where a candidate is just that popular within his lane that all types of voters in all types of factions support them, with the exception of the most radical parts of those factions.

Just like with Jagmeet for the NDP--Niki Ashton holding on to the "radical parts", and Charlie Angus, while not the wet noodle Charest was, being reduced to "remnant vote" status...

[DistingFlyer]

Here's another map, this one showing the winners' margins in each riding:

[MaxQue]

First consequence of the CPC having lost touch with reality, Quebec MP Alain Rayes leaves the party, saying he believes in law and order, unlike Poilievre.

[mileslunn]

First consequence of the CPC having lost touch with reality, Quebec MP Alain Rayes leaves the party, saying he believes in law and order, unlike Poilievre.

I think we are seeing growing polarization and a lot of traditional Liberals and old PCs no longer feel at home in the more hyper partisan bare knuckles politics.  Historically politics was about serving country and ideology took back seat.  Today its more about pushing a certain ideology and generally strong dislike of opponents.

It will be interesting to see how next election plays out but my guess is no matter the result, country will be even more divided.  If Trudeau wins again, I could see right really losing it and going off deep end and even questioning legitimacy.  If Poilievre wins, left will be scared and angry, but probably will see type of mobilization and unity you haven't seen in years.

[OSR stands with Israel]

First consequence of the CPC having lost touch with reality, Quebec MP Alain Rayes leaves the party, saying he believes in law and order, unlike Poilievre.

So the Canadian equivalent of Change UK and the Lincoln Project Appears . Well and don’t forget back in 2004 when Joe Clark endorsed the Libs :

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1790840235

[mileslunn]

First consequence of the CPC having lost touch with reality, Quebec MP Alain Rayes leaves the party, saying he believes in law and order, unlike Poilievre.

So the Canadian equivalent of Change UK and the Lincoln Project Appears . Well and don’t forget back in 2004 when Joe Clark endorsed the Libs :

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1790840235

Change UK was a flop but also Corbyn was pretty far left so I think that made it easier for your Wets to fall in line whatever misgivings had of Boris.  Lincoln Project may have been small in numbers but election was close enough that the Never Trump Republicans were what cost Trump his second term.  Had they stayed with GOP or voted for third party, Trump would have won a second term.  I am guessing Lincoln Project only around 2% of Americans, but that was enough to tip the scales.

[OSR stands with Israel]

First consequence of the CPC having lost touch with reality, Quebec MP Alain Rayes leaves the party, saying he believes in law and order, unlike Poilievre.

So the Canadian equivalent of Change UK and the Lincoln Project Appears . Well and don’t forget back in 2004 when Joe Clark endorsed the Libs :

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1790840235

Change UK was a flop but also Corbyn was pretty far left so I think that made it easier for your Wets to fall in line whatever misgivings had of Boris.  Lincoln Project may have been small in numbers but election was close enough that the Never Trump Republicans were what cost Trump his second term.  Had they stayed with GOP or voted for third party, Trump would have won a second term.  I am guessing Lincoln Project only around 2% of Americans, but that was enough to tip the scales.

1. Fair

2. Sure but that would probably mean a Result with liberals getting around 10 more seats than the Tories in which case Pierre probably stays and there is another election in a year . Keep in mind they did  fail in 2016 though

[omar04]

So how authentic is PP's populism to Canadians? His anti elite rhetoric comes off a bit hypocritical for a career politician.

That is a good question.  I think Poilievre is a real wild card.  He is more a populist in tea party mold or a populist version of Reagan/Thatcher or here in Canada Mike Harris/Ralph Klein.  Otherwise very much your small government type.  Generally Canadians have been weary of small government conservatism but possible with how bad a job government doing at so many things, this message will work.  He is a high risk high reward type.  In that he could do something many thought was not possible and permanently re-align politics like Reagan and Thatcher did.  On other hand possible he flops badly and creates a situation where Conservatives need to get used to losing as gap between their supporters and rest too hard to bridge.  We won't know until next election.

Based off the press conference kerfuffle he might be closer to Trump 😉

[mileslunn]

First consequence of the CPC having lost touch with reality, Quebec MP Alain Rayes leaves the party, saying he believes in law and order, unlike Poilievre.

So the Canadian equivalent of Change UK and the Lincoln Project Appears . Well and don’t forget back in 2004 when Joe Clark endorsed the Libs :

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1790840235

Change UK was a flop but also Corbyn was pretty far left so I think that made it easier for your Wets to fall in line whatever misgivings had of Boris.  Lincoln Project may have been small in numbers but election was close enough that the Never Trump Republicans were what cost Trump his second term.  Had they stayed with GOP or voted for third party, Trump would have won a second term.  I am guessing Lincoln Project only around 2% of Americans, but that was enough to tip the scales.

1. Fair

2. Sure but that would probably mean a Result with liberals getting around 10 more seats than the Tories in which case Pierre probably stays and there is another election in a year . Keep in mind they did  fail in 2016 though

Most Lincoln Project types were Romney 12 - Johnson 16 - Biden 20 voters.  Trump got a larger share of the popular vote in 2020 (46.8%) than 2016 (46%) but lost as third party support largely swung behind Biden who gained even more.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

First consequence of the CPC having lost touch with reality, Quebec MP Alain Rayes leaves the party, saying he believes in law and order, unlike Poilievre.

So the Canadian equivalent of Change UK and the Lincoln Project Appears . Well and don’t forget back in 2004 when Joe Clark endorsed the Libs :

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1790840235

I wouldn't even compare it to that. Alain Rayes leaving the party seems to be a one-off, no other caucus member joined him. I highly, highly doubt he'll try to start his own party like Change UK, or endorse the Liberals like the Lincoln Project (or Joe Clark for that matter) - although it's possible that over the next few years, some kind of PC revival attempt emerges.

In general though, splinter parties tend to emerge from parties that are in power, not those in opposition. Remember that the Reform-PC split happened in the wake of Mulroney's crushing majorities.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

What's also interesting is the drop in support for social conservative candidates. Social conservative voters were key in both 2017 and 2022, and their preferences helped elect both Scheer and O'Toole.

2017: 16% (Lemieux+Trost)
2020: 25% (Lewis)
2022: 10% (Lewis)

I suppose some of that is due to the party signing up new memberships of more disenfranchised types who are less likely to be socially conservative. Social conservatives may have also been turned off from participating in the party because they didn't get anything in return from supporting O'Toole and Scheer.

A third factor is that Poilievre has unique credibility with most factions within the party, including so-cons, even though he gave so-cons virtually nothing in the leadership campaign. Apart from the most hardcore single-issue religious right voters, so-cons tend to fall in line if they trust a leader, even one who won't give them much.

[CumbrianLefty]

First consequence of the CPC having lost touch with reality, Quebec MP Alain Rayes leaves the party, saying he believes in law and order, unlike Poilievre.

So the Canadian equivalent of Change UK and the Lincoln Project Appears . Well and don’t forget back in 2004 when Joe Clark endorsed the Libs :

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1790840235

Change UK was a flop but also Corbyn was pretty far left so I think that made it easier for your Wets to fall in line whatever misgivings had of Boris.  Lincoln Project may have been small in numbers but election was close enough that the Never Trump Republicans were what cost Trump his second term.  Had they stayed with GOP or voted for third party, Trump would have won a second term.  I am guessing Lincoln Project only around 2% of Americans, but that was enough to tip the scales.

1. Fair

2. Sure but that would probably mean a Result with liberals getting around 10 more seats than the Tories in which case Pierre probably stays and there is another election in a year . Keep in mind they did  fail in 2016 though

Most Lincoln Project types were Romney 12 - Johnson 16 - Biden 20 voters.  Trump got a larger share of the popular vote in 2020 (46.8%) than 2016 (46%) but lost as third party support largely swung behind Biden who gained even more.

Yes, but as ever those straight percentage changes hide underlying "churn".

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

So how authentic is PP's populism to Canadians? His anti elite rhetoric comes off a bit hypocritical for a career politician.

It's hard to answer how authentic it is, because obviously people will disagree on whether it's authentic to them. For some Canadians, Poilievre is the most authentic politician they've ever seen, and for others, he's a phony right-winger trying to ride a wave with cynical promises. Obviously his background as a career politician undercuts his "man of the people" bona fides a little bit, but he plays up other aspects of his upbringing to counter that. He was born to a single 16-year old mother, given up for adoption, and raised in a non-political middle-class family. So there's a kind of conservative appeal of "pulling yourself up by the bootstraps" there.

In some ways, Poilievre isn't even saying the things that a populist conservative "should". Normally, populist conservatives tend to focus on social issues and nationalism/nativism as their driving priorities, while minimizing their right-wing economic views which may be perceived as elitist. Poilievre minimizes social issues, is not a nativist and has put forward some pretty immigrant-friendly ideas, and while he is somewhat nationalistic, it's not a big part of his pitch. Instead, his pitch is more about cutting taxes, cutting regulations, cutting spending, not exactly traditional populism. In American terms, he's almost like Mitt Romney on policy but Ron DeSantis in presentation (although one area where he's definitely taken the "populist" lane is his strident opposition to vaccine mandates and the WEF, but that's not his main pitch either).

His populism is anti-Laurentian. I won't go into it too much, but this concept of the "Laurentian Elite" was popularized by author/commentator John Ibbitson during the Harper years. The idea is that there's a certain "elite" based in the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal axis that dominates politics in Canada, but also academia, entertainment, media, etc. They tend to be centre-to-centre-left, pretty deferential to state authority, anti-American, pro-welfare state but pro-business, and practice soft protectionism. "Populist conservatism" in Canada exists as a counter to that, and while Harper was a bit too boring to come off as a "real" populist, he championed the same kind of anti-Laurentian populism that Poilievre now champions.

The sentiment of a populist conservative in Canada re: the Laurentian elite is described by Ibbitson as:
They're running the country but they're running it into the ground, and they won't listen to us.

So with that framework, a populist conservative in Canada doesn't care if a politician has a fairly elite background, which Poilievre doesn't really. I mean to the extent that being a career politician undercuts his populist bona fides, remember that his opponent is the son of a famous Prime Minister. But what's more relevant to Poilievre's populism is the strident anti-Laurentian politics.

Will it resonate with Canadians? It will resonate with Canadians to the extent that Canadians agree with the sentiment that the Liberals are running the country but they're running it into the ground, and they won't listen to us.

[MaxQue]

To me, Laurentian Elite just sounds like a repackaged "Western Alienation".

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

To me, Laurentian Elite just sounds like a repackaged "Western Alienation".

Those are related things, correct. As someone with strong connections to western Canada though, I can relate to the argument behind it, even if a lot of it is irrational populism.

[MaxQue]

And now Poilievre is texting party members so they harass Rayes' staffers.

[Hatman 🍁]

Skippy keeps talking about the "gatekeepers" as the new bogeyman we need to be worried about. Is this the Canadian version of draining the swamp?

[mileslunn]

What's also interesting is the drop in support for social conservative candidates. Social conservative voters were key in both 2017 and 2022, and their preferences helped elect both Scheer and O'Toole.

2017: 16% (Lemieux+Trost)
2020: 25% (Lewis)
2022: 10% (Lewis)

I suppose some of that is due to the party signing up new memberships of more disenfranchised types who are less likely to be socially conservative. Social conservatives may have also been turned off from participating in the party because they didn't get anything in return from supporting O'Toole and Scheer.

A third factor is that Poilievre has unique credibility with most factions within the party, including so-cons, even though he gave so-cons virtually nothing in the leadership campaign. Apart from the most hardcore single-issue religious right voters, so-cons tend to fall in line if they trust a leader, even one who won't give them much.

I think his unity comes from two reasons.

1.  Social Conservatives more than anything want an unabashed conservative who won't apologize for being one and Poilievre is that even if his focus is more economic.

2.  Moderates like Poilievre believe government has gotten too big and needs to be reduced.  Its more a matter of degree so yes he could lose them if he goes too far once in power, but while true moderates tend to usually shun a small government message, if government is seen as growing too much different story.  See Mike Harris in 1995 or Margaret Thatcher in UK.  Both brought along moderates as belief was both cases had swung too far to left and needed change.

[mileslunn]

To me, Laurentian Elite just sounds like a repackaged "Western Alienation".

Those are related things, correct. As someone with strong connections to western Canada though, I can relate to the argument behind it, even if a lot of it is irrational populism.

Its not just West vs. East it is more urban vs. rural too as even rural areas in Central Canada tend to have a strong negative view of largest metro areas.  That is why in Ontario, Conservatives dominate rural areas.  In Quebec, you have BQ for anti-Montreal attitude so harder there and at least they are a homegrown culturally sensitive party.  In Western Canada, Vancouver is very much your Laurentian Elite type city.  In many ways its like US with areas near large bodies of water being more progressive while inland areas or as they call in US fly over country being more right wing populist.  Calgary I also don't think is that populists.  Conservatives dominate it more because they are most pro energy sector party which plays a big role in economy but if progressives were more pro energy, I think it would be a lot more competitive than it is.  Reason Notley is tied or ahead there in polls is she unlike most progressives is pro energy sector.

[mileslunn]

Skippy keeps talking about the "gatekeepers" as the new bogeyman we need to be worried about. Is this the Canadian version of draining the swamp?

I think Poilievre is more like your Thatcher or Reagan type or even your Mike Harris type.  He is total opposite of Boris Johnson who despite being labeled a right wing populist, he actually expanded the size of the state.  Poilievre much more like Liz Truss on policy, just more in your face and over top rhetoric. 

Danger is like politicians mentioned above he may over do it.  Ford and Harper both were small government types but both willing to buck that when circumstances warranted like Harper increasing spending during Great Recession and Ford with Covid restrictions.  Poilievre doesn't strike me as type who would be willing to break his small government ideology even if circumstances warranted it.

He seems more type lower taxes is always good, less spending always good, less regulation always good as opposed to like Mulroney or Harper the above is generally good but their exceptions to the rules.

[Poirot]

Skippy keeps talking about the "gatekeepers" as the new bogeyman we need to be worried about. Is this the Canadian version of draining the swamp?

Does he tranlsate gatekeepers in French? I'm not sure what it means, establishment, or elite?

I don't think I'm the target audience because gatekeepers and Laurentian elite are a bit foreign concepts.

[Poirot]

And now Poilievre is texting party members so they harass Rayes' staffers.

Someone from the Poilievre surroundings wants them to phone Rayes office and ask him to resign. Politics could become terrible (unless you like people screaming at each other). I'm not looking for more attacks, more name calling, more vengeance, more enemies. 

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Skippy keeps talking about the "gatekeepers" as the new bogeyman we need to be worried about. Is this the Canadian version of draining the swamp?

Does he tranlsate gatekeepers in French? I'm not sure what it means, establishment, or elite?

I don't think I'm the target audience because gatekeepers and Laurentian elite are a bit foreign concepts.

"Laurentian elite" isn't something he talks about, tbf. It's an obsession of more intellectual-type conservatives. "Gatekeeper", meanwhile, may well be Pierre's favourite word in the English language.

If we think of Poilievre's strategy as one that tries to unite anti-establishment populists with traditional fiscal conservatives, the "anti-gatekeeper" theme is a brilliant one. He uses the phrase "fire the gatekeepers" where a traditional fiscal conservative might have said "deregulate the ____ industry".

[OSR stands with Israel]

Skippy keeps talking about the "gatekeepers" as the new bogeyman we need to be worried about. Is this the Canadian version of draining the swamp?

Does he tranlsate gatekeepers in French? I'm not sure what it means, establishment, or elite?

I don't think I'm the target audience because gatekeepers and Laurentian elite are a bit foreign concepts.

"Laurentian elite" isn't something he talks about, tbf. It's an obsession of more intellectual-type conservatives. "Gatekeeper", meanwhile, may well be Pierre's favourite word in the English language.

If we think of Poilievre's strategy as one that tries to unite anti-establishment populists with traditional fiscal conservatives, the "anti-gatekeeper" theme is a brilliant one. He uses the phrase "fire the gatekeepers" where a traditional fiscal conservative might have said "deregulate the ____ industry".

Also the fact is if you are a conservative running against the bureaucracy works well across the board:

Economic Conservatives: The bureaucracy in their view tends to be the people who put way too much regulation and rules on business so the anti regulation message fits in here

Social Conservatives: The bureaucracy in their view tends to be the people who are more culturally liberal and woke and running against that could be popular with social conservatives

Populists: The bureaucracy in their view tends to be a bunch of elitists who look down on the average person so running against the bureaucracy could resonate a lot with populists

Libertarian: This is self explanatory given they are anti big government

[Hatman 🍁]

Skippy keeps talking about the "gatekeepers" as the new bogeyman we need to be worried about. Is this the Canadian version of draining the swamp?

Does he tranlsate gatekeepers in French? I'm not sure what it means, establishment, or elite?

Hansard translates it as "empêcheurs"