2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

No surprise that Poilievre is running, he's basically functioned as the de facto leader of the CPC since the 2019 election defeat. The leadership is his to lose - keep in mind, 2020 was MacKay's to lose, and while Bernier wasn't an obvious frontrunner in 2017, he did consistently pull ahead of Scheer in the polls and donations. There's enough time for his star to burn out, but it's very hard to see anyone else in caucus who could genuinely challenge Poilievre.

Deltell could have been a formidable opponent if he were more well-known outside Quebec, but Quebec alone won't win him the leadership. Bernier managed to break out of the Quebec trap in 2017, but he was...unique. Deltell is just a boring old guy with typical Conservative ideas, I don't see him getting much traction.

Unless Ambrose jumps in, it's hard to think of anyone who could seriously challenge Poilievre. Maybe Michelle Rempel Garner, who is more moderate on social issues, but her appeal is similar to Poilievre's, so she's fishing out the same pond. There are some dark horses like Melissa Lantsman, James Moore, Eric Duncan and Lisa Raitt, but Poilievre is an institution among Tory voters, dark horses don't usually beat institutions. Leslyn Lewis could once again shore up the religious right vote, but that will probably benefit Poilievre downballot.

So yeah, as of right now, PP is the guy to beat, and a tough one to beat at that.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I'd caution against the notion that Poilievre is simply too right-wing to win a general election though. The closest parallel to Pierre Poilievre in recent Canadian history might be Mike Harris (except Harris had private-sector experience, so more credibility on that front), and whatever you think about Mike Harris, he was a winner. Ginning up the existing pool of right-wing voters, while letting the Liberals bleed votes out of fatigue, might not be the worst strategy.

I think O'Toole's moderate hero act was a bit much, and the next CPC leader should be a little bit more confident in taking more conservative stances. However, Poilievre's style might be a little too much. I think the CPC needs a Stephen Harper type figure, someone who can fire up movement conservatives but in a more calm, less polarizing style so that moderates can feel more comfortable backing them, or at least not running to the Libs. But the idea that Poilievre is a give-away to the Liberals is probably a little naive.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Just listened to Poilievre's announcement speech. I lost count of how many times he said "free" or mentioned "freedom", but I guess that's the theme for his leadership run.

Yeah, I think he's setting the right tone, at least for the CPC leadership. It's the kind of thing I could see energizing and mobilizing the base. His language of "smaller government = bigger people" struck me as very Reagan-esque, so he's definitely going for that movement conservative kind of lane.

Apart from not touching religious/social conservative themes (I think even a right-wing bulldog like him can realize that ain't gonna fly in today's Canada), a lot of his language seemed very similar to what you could imagine Mitt Romney saying. Very fiscally conservative, and heavy on the American-like theme of freedom. I'm not sure it's gonna work with the general public, but as far as the CPC base goes, it seems to be the right tone.

God, I'm really hoping for an upset. Pierre Poilievre is good at politics, because that's literally all he's done in his life. But this kind of professional politician with little experience beyond partisan activism also tends to be terrible at actually running a government.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I've always thought CPC MPs with lots of real world experience not conducive to being strong political performers - like Rob Morrison - seem to get sidelined, when they might have the makings of decent ministers.

Oh sure.  There are quite a number of fairly impressive Conservative M.Ps. Just to name a few in the West: Todd Doherty, John Barlow, Ron Liepert, Tim Uppal, Randy Hoback, Kelly Block, Marty Morantz and Raquel Dancho (even though she was a career political staffer.)  

Yeah, there really is some talent within the CPC (far, far less than the LPC, but it's there). Harper himself had a pretty impressive history, having played a pretty big role in the early foundations of Reform (he left after disagreeing with Manning on the party's vision).

In 2017, Scheer really stuck out to me as an MP with very little to show for himself other than having been elected speaker, which of course is hardly an impressive role in the Canadian system. It was surprising to me at the time that he was the CPC's choice. O'Toole has a somewhat interesting background, but the new presumptive frontrunner is another career politician.

To be fair, Trudeau didn't exactly have an impressive resume either, apart from having the right father. Certainly nothing compared to what people like Freeland or even Champagne and Anand bring to the table. Nor does Singh have a particularly impressive resume, he was really a small-scale lawyer before becoming an NDP MPP. But it seems to be that in today's environment, "qualifications" beyond politics don't really matter all that much.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I'd caution against the notion that Poilievre is simply too right-wing to win a general election though. The closest parallel to Pierre Poilievre in recent Canadian history might be Mike Harris (except Harris had private-sector experience, so more credibility on that front), and whatever you think about Mike Harris, he was a winner. Ginning up the existing pool of right-wing voters, while letting the Liberals bleed votes out of fatigue, might not be the worst strategy.

Actually, *the* closest too-right-wing-to-win parallel in recent Canadian history is Rob Ford as Toronto Mayor in '10.  (Doug Ford as Premier in '18 was more a matter of coasting on fumes and infrastructure already in place upon Patrick Brown's abrupt departure.)

Even Harris wasn't necessarily "too right wing"--his party still had Big Blue Machine good will floating about it going into '95.  Any cast of "unelectability" had more to do w/their preceding '87-95 3rd party slumber and the reflected inglory of the federal PC implosion and rise of Reform in '93.

Harris was still backed by the Big Blue Machine, but said machine lost its power after Bill Davis Left. Let's not forget, in 1987 and 1990, the Tories finished in a rather embarassing third place. Harris rode an anti-NDP wave on his "common sense revolution" rhetoric, which was pretty different from what the likes of Bill Davis won on.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

As of 7:00 PM on Feb 5, based on a CBC article, Poilievre already has the following endorsements:

Dan Albas.
Michael Barrett.
John Barlow.
James Bezan.
Michael Cooper.
Todd Doherty.
Marilyn Gladu.
Michael Kram.
Melissa Lantsman.
Philip Lawrence.
Jamie Schmale.
Jake Stewart.
Corey Tochor.
Ryan Williams.
Bob Zimmer.

No real geographic pattern with these people, ranging from suburban Toronto to rural Alberta. One major exception of note though - no Quebecers. As I suspected, the QC caucus isn't too keen on Poilievre.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Anyone want to take bets on which washed up politician from 15 years ago that the media will talk up before they inevitably don't run? AKA the Jean Charest option

What's Bernard Lord up to these days?

Some people are asking Charest to run.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/conservatives-eye-charest-as-potential-leader-again-1.6342373

I don't know if Peter Mackay wants to try a second run. A potential candidate is Tasha Kheiriddin who is thinking about it.

Peter MacKay's still trying to pay off his 2020 run debt, and things seem pretty dire considering Harper recently came out urging Tories to donate to him. Maybe this is a 4D chess move by Steve to help his old pal Pete pay off his debt so he can take on Poilievre - what's more likely, is that MacKay is deep in the hole and in no position to take a second stab at the leadership, especially in a contest where he's not the favourite.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

As for some of the other names from the moderate wing of the party being thrown around - Jean Charest and Patrick Brown I've read about recently:

LOL. Not gonna happen. Charest might at least do well enough in Quebec to give Poilievre a good run for his money, but he's not winning. And if Patrick Brown runs for the leadership, he will win exactly five ridings - Brampton East, Brampton North, Brampton Centre, Brampton South, and Brampton West.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Tory factions are messy, but for simplicity's sake, Blues + Populists + Socons is a substantial majority of the membership.

I think part of the problem is that people don't really know what a "red" Tory is, or don't know how to define it properly. A lot of people think a red tory is simply a Tory who's moderate or liberal on social issues. I agree that a socially conservative leader won't win the Tories a general election, but you can be blue and not so-con - in fact, most blues aren't.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Here's how I see the different factions of today's CPC, anyway:

1. Red-Green Tories: The traditional Robert Stanfield/Bill Davis type red tories are dead. I think in today's context, a Red Tory is a Tory who has a fundamentally liberal worldview and assumption, but lands on more conservative positions. MacKay, Chong, Brown, John Tory, Tim Houston, etc. I added "Green" because this faction also tends to hold more concern about climate change.

2. Blue Tories: In today's context, the blues are the dominant faction. Unlike the Reds, they get their worldview from a more Reaganite/Thatcherite philosophy, but like the reds, steer clear of social issues. Poilievre is deep down a very blue Tory, although his rhetoric straddles the populist line.

3. Social Conservatives: Religious right. Their main focus is on Christian stuff. Leslyn Lewis is a good example.

4. Populists: Growing faction within the base, but I think CPC politicians really only represent them in rhetoric. Like Doug Ford who campaigned as a populist but has governed as a blue. I think Poilievre is the same. The populist right tends to have views all over the place, but are united in a distrust of government.

5. Liber-tory-ians: Maxime Bernier was one, but he went down the deep end of populism. This is a small group, but yeah, libertarian tories. They distrust government and institutions like populists, and prioritize right-wing economics like blues, and like the reds, their worldview comes from a fundamentally (classical) liberal place, not a traditionally conservative one.

This is just my analysis, I'm sure others would see things differently, but this is why I don't believe in the whole "moderate vs so-con" narrative of Canadian political commentators. The CPC has unusual ideological diversity for a Canadian political party, because anyone who identifies with the right finds their way into the CPC. In any leadership race, the winning candidate straddles the line between two factions, throws bones to two others, and ignores one. Scheer in 2017 straddled blue-socon, threw bones to populists and libertarians, and ditched the reds. O'Toole in 2020 straddled the blue-populist line, threw bones to reds and so-cons, and ditched the libertarians. It seems like Poilievre's strategy is to straddle blue-populist, throw bones to so-cons and libertarians, and ditch the reds.

In this sense, I think PP will run basically the same campaign that O'Toole did in 2020 in terms of who he focuses on, but he's simply a more genuine/authentic messenger to the right than O'Toole was.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Interesting background on the Canadian Conservative movement:

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/under-the-big-tent-conservative-division-in-canada-1.6342930

Pretty good listen, I had it on the background while getting some work done - not really new information for nerds like us, but it seemed like a pretty fair and comprehensive history of the postwar Conservative movement in this country.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Would Charest's Huawei links severely undermine his bid?

I don't know much about his Huawei links, but boy, that is NOT the company to have ties to if you want to get elected to anything in Canada.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Saw a column by Chantal Hebert praising Jean Charest as the guy who can save the moderate wing of the party. Granted, I'm not super familiar with Charest (not from Quebec, and I was too young when he was a federal politician), and I don't doubt Chantal Hebert has a better feel for the guy. But it speaks to the weak state of the moderate wing that he's the biggest name being thrown around.

Let's just look at the fundamentals here. At 63, Jean Charest would be the oldest person to be elected as a major party leader since Louis Saint-Laurent. No doubt he's a very experienced and qualified person, but he's been out of the political arena for a decade. He will have to deal with a deeply divided caucus, of which he has never been part, and compete to become Prime Minister as he approaches retirement age. Yes that's a very superficial biography, but some people have the "feel" of a winner, and in the context of this leadership election, he distinctly does not have this "feel".

I think if Lisa Raitt had held her seat in Milton, she would have been a strong contender to challenge Poilievre, but her time has passed. Christine Elliott is another, but she's 66 now, and has lost the last three times she tried to become PCPO leader, no reason to think she would go for a chance to be a smaller fish in a bigger pond.

Unless something big happens, the question isn't if Poilievre will be the next leader, but by how much.

[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.

That's the question though, who are these "disenchanted Liberals"? And why do we assume Charest would win them over?

I think the assumption is that this would be blue liberals, bay street boys, etc. This is not a huge portion of the Canadian population by any stretch, and the influence of those interests isn't what it used to be. The most effective model for a Conservative victory in the GTA in today's context is shown by Doug Ford - someone whose appeal is nothing like Charest's. The hypothesis that there is a mass of blue Liberals who like Liberal values but want less spending was tested in 2021, and it didn't work out too well for O'Toole.

In my experience, disenchantment among the Liberal base is coming from young people and people frustrated about covid measures - the venn diagram between those two has a lot of overlap. Between Jean Charest and Pierre Poilievre, the latter is an infinitely better choice to appeal to this group. Anyone in English Canada who is under 40 and not obsessed with politics has no idea who Jean Charest is, and Quebecers under 40 don't exactly tend to have the fondest memories of the guy.

Edit: To be clear, I don't think Poilievre is a silver bullet who would energize disenchanted voters into propelling the Tories back to power. Poilievre is an ideologue, and dogmatic conservatism isn't super popular in Canada these days. But the hypothesis that Jean Charest would chip off Liberal voters because he's fiscally conservative and culturally liberal assumes that there are lots of current Liberal voters looking for that, and I don't think that's the case. If I'm right, and frustration among the Liberal base is coming from young people who are losing faith in the political establishment, Charest seems like the exact opposite of what they would want.

[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.

That's the question though, who are these "disenchanted Liberals"? And why do we assume Charest would win them over?

I think the assumption is that this would be blue liberals, bay street boys, etc. This is not a huge portion of the Canadian population by any stretch, and the influence of those interests isn't what it used to be. The most effective model for a Conservative victory in the GTA in today's context is shown by Doug Ford - someone whose appeal is nothing like Charest's. The hypothesis that there is a mass of blue Liberals who like Liberal values but want less spending was tested in 2021, and it didn't work out too well for O'Toole.

In my experience, disenchantment among the Liberal base is coming from young people and people frustrated about covid measures - the venn diagram between those two has a lot of overlap. Between Jean Charest and Pierre Poilievre, the latter is an infinitely better choice to appeal to this group. Anyone in English Canada who is under 40 and not obsessed with politics has no idea who Jean Charest is, and Quebecers under 40 don't exactly tend to have the fondest memories of the guy.

Edit: To be clear, I don't think Poilievre is a silver bullet who would energize disenchanted voters into propelling the Tories back to power. Poilievre is an ideologue, and dogmatic conservatism isn't super popular in Canada these days. But the hypothesis that Jean Charest would chip off Liberal voters because he's fiscally conservative and culturally liberal assumes that there are lots of current Liberal voters looking for that, and I don't think that's the case. If I'm right, and frustration among the Liberal base is coming from young people who are losing faith in the political establishment, Charest seems like the exact opposite of what they would want.

That is largely true, but there still is some potential here.  Your white upper middle class suburbs like Burlington, Kanata-Carleton, West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country, Winnipeg South, Oakville, and Eglinton-Lawrence all examples of those.  And O'Toole did much better in most of those than Scheer although fell a bit short.  By contrast Ford underperformed in those.  But it won't as you mention get party to power on its own.  Still if there is enough disenchantment with Liberals it could be what puts them over top.  It was this group that put Biden in power as you look at areas where Trump underperformed Romney the most and those were upper middle class suburbs with lots of college educated whites like Chester County, PA; Fairfield County, CT; Morris County, NJ etc, and a precinct level loads of these such as Darien, CT; Westlake, Ohio; Powell, Ohio. 

On other hand Boris Johnson won places like Chelsea & Fulham; Cities of London & Westminster; Cheadle, much of London Commuter belt without exactly appealing to them and did so due to opposition of Corbyn.

BC Liberals were in many ways this type of party and until recently they were very successful of centre-right parties thus reason for appeal, but in last decade really lost a lot of ground so not sure it gives same success as in past.  Now yes possible if Deficit hits crisis levels like mid 90s that changes.  Likewise if Trudeau starts raising taxes on top 10%, not just top 1% or there is a major exodus of latter then possible.  But right now not as such stage.  I think former happens soon, latter on taxes I don't see happening.

My preference is fiscally conservative but socially liberal and still see some potential, but I don't think it excites or inspires people.  I think its more type of policy that works well when high level of fatigue with Liberals.  On covid restrictions, I totally agree and big potential amongst younger voters.  PCQ in Quebec being at over 20% amongst millennials is evidence of that.  Likewise be interested to see if this saves UCP in Alberta as while I expect Notley to win next year, if UCP does come back, I think UCP promise to drop all restrictions permanently but fear NDP will bring them back will be big reason, not bringing back Flat tax or a balanced budget (former I think hurts party actually).  By same token if next election is not until 2024 or 2025, I suspect COVID-19 is endemic and more importantly I don't think any party will be calling for public health restrictions by then.  Real difference asides from your Randy Hillier types who always opposed any restrictions is more a matter of just how fast and timing so right now because of where we are in pandemic, its showing up heavily, but just as most united asides fringe for restrictions in March 2020, I suspect by 2024, wanting to go back into lockdown or other restrictions will be political suicide.

You mentioned places like Burlington, Eglinton-Lawrence, etc showing a rightward trend in 2021. This is true - but these places generally had a pretty big leftward swing in 2019, probably because an pro-lifer from Saskatchewan is a uniquely bad fit. But compared to Harper, O'Toole didn't do significantly better with these voters, and depending on which ridings you look at, considerably worse. And remember that in 2015, Trudeau was only promising $10B deficits and pretty limited expansions to social programs, and Harper was running on things like 'barbaric cultural practices hotline'.

I think the cohort of voters who vote Liberal but are concerned about big deficits or other fiscal conservative priorities are marginal at this point. If there is a fiscal conservative priority that has been permeating the mainstream, it's inflation, and Poilievre is the loudest anti-inflation crusader there is. Do I think PP has any credibility on it? Nope, not in the slightest, but most voters don't care or understand the specifics of economic policy, they want someone who speaks to their concerns. And inflation is an issue that not only riles up more well-off people who are seeing their assets depreciate, but also low-income people who are struggling with basic necessities. Charest may be a good fit for the former, he absolutely is not for the latter.

[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'm not from Quebec, but my hunch is that it's an alliance of pragmatism more than anything else. Poilievre is a much more dogmatic conservative than the CAQ government represents, he's more PCQ in that sense. There's no reason to believe that Poilievre would be a good fit for Quebec - Charest, while hated by many Quebecers, did win three provincial elections, Liberal or not.

When Charest became PLQ leader, there was no CAQ, and its predecessor ADQ had one seat. Even Legault was a Pequiste back then. For the most part, any good federalist like Charest in the 90s would align with the Liberals, and for that matter, any good nationalist like Legault would join PQ. So the feelings are probably less hard towards someone like Charest compared to someone who joined the PLQ after ADQ/CAQ became a genuine force in Quebec politics.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

- Pierre Poilievre
- Leslyn Lewis
- Jean Charest
- Michael Chong
- Patrick Brown
- Roman Baber

Roman Baber? Lol. Maybe he's thinking about running and sponsored the poll that you got, I'm not sure what independent polling firm would prompt for a rookie MPP best known for leaving the party.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

https://twitter.com/SyntheticPol/status/1493872944501559300?cxt=HHwWiMCoyebhprsp...
This map of ridings that gets CPC to 150 with minimal gains in the GTA.

143-137 is a very small margin to be targeting though. Short of winning over rural Quebec, this strategy would be a difficult one to pull off, and impossible to win a majority.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

https://twitter.com/SyntheticPol/status/1493872944501559300?cxt=HHwWiMCoyebhprsp...
This map of ridings that gets CPC to 150 with minimal gains in the GTA.

143-137 is a very small margin to be targeting though. Short of winning over rural Quebec, this strategy would be a difficult one to pull off, and impossible to win a majority.

Oh, maybe I should have clarified to ignore the tweet at the bottom about path to power.
Certainly not the only strategy and ridings the CPC should be targeting. They should do this in conjunction with other strategies. Personally, I think they combine this with a "Ford nation' effect in Toronto and Vancouver.

However, I think the strategy above in the map should be priority No.1. It is a good starting point. It is probably the path of least resistance in winning more seats. Also, I think Conservative supporters will be more comfortable pursuing this kind of strategy than a Oakville/Burlington strategy. (white upper middle class areas)

Interestingly, the 'Ford Nation' effect did wonders in some upper middle class suburbs (York Region), but not as well as you'd expect of the Tories in other upper middle class suburbs like Halton Region, specifically Oakville and Burlington. York and Halton are both some of the most well-off and highly-educated parts of Ontario. The key difference seems demographics other than income - York Region is predominantly "white ethnic" (primarily Italian and Jewish) and Chinese, while Halton Region is more "WASP", with a recent influx of South Asians in Oakville and especially Milton.

Rural whites in Ontario without a university education are already largely in the Tory column, and in the part of rural Ontario where they're not (i.e., Northern Ontario), the trend is heading that way. Very urban areas, regardless of ethnic makeup, are not worth pursuing for the Tories. But the suburbs are kind of a weird mix, white suburbanites aren't as homogenous as they used to be (in the Harper years, there wasn't really a difference in how York and Halton voted), and non-white suburbs tend to be even harder to get a pulse on, like the suburban Chinese-Canadian vote which swung hard to the Liberals in 2021, after having voted Conservative in 2015 and 2019.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

If you watch 44:00-44:36 in the video.

Are whites in Ajax traditionally composed of WASPs?

Yes, whites in Durham Region are probably the most WASP of any region of the GTA. But Ajax is majority-minority now, predominantly South Asian and black populations that have moved eastwards from Scarborough, so the partisan makeup is more Liberal-friendly now.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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