2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election

[DC Al Fine]

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?

[DC Al Fine]

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.

Election Twitter seems to be casting about for a Red Tory saviour. I don't think they understand how dire the situation for the Reds is. I mean, Philippe Fournier was talking up Tasha Khedderin as a potential winner! Not a candidate, a winner!

Tory factions are messy, but for simplicity's sake, Blues + Populists + Socons is a substantial majority of the membership. Peter MacKay is far and away the most effective Red Tory candidate, in part because he was able to make some inroads with the first two groups, and even a little bit with the Socons before he threw that away. Charest, Chong, Khedderin, and Brown will all struggle to make those inroads.

If we want the race to be interesting, a better option would be Lewis, or a Westerner.

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.

Patrick Brown stan logic: If the Tories just turfed their leader for flip-flopping, they must be ready for a Tory leader who flip flops AND has a sex scandal

[DC Al Fine]

What I can't for the life of me figure out is why Charest is going through this whole "will-he-or-won't-he" thing again

Last leadership race he mulled running before eventually declining  and the media narrative at the time was that he thought he didn't have a path to victory, was shocked at how much the party base had shifted etc etc.

That was in 2020. What's changed in two years that would give him that path to victory?

[DC Al Fine]

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?

[DC Al Fine]

Genuine question: How big is Brown’s ego?

Not as big as his libido apparently.

[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.

[DC Al Fine]

Jean Charest,  Tasha Kheiriddin and Patrick Brown?

I don't know what all the dislike here for Patrick Brown is about, it seems like he's a pretty solid and well liked mayor of Brampton as far as I can tell, and the things about him prior to that are not verified and are highly debatable.  However, it's still a bit surprising and disappointing to see not a single current more progressive Conservative M.P is considering running.

Not that they are all necessarily more progressive, but they are generally regarded as more reflective anyway, I would have thought at least one of these would run:

1.Blake Richards
2.Randy Hoback
3.Michael Chong
4.Luc Berthold/Pierre Paul Hus
5.Rob Moore

On the Patrick Brown thing, it's not so much that I dislike him as much as I just think he would be one of the worst options to unite the party.

I have it on good authority that the women he got MeToo'd over were only a fraction of the women that could have MeToo'd him. That would come out over any campaign.

[DC Al Fine]

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.

Such a party would be lucky to have the success of the Progressive Conservatives under Jean Charest and Joe Clark.

I have a theory that the closest equivalent to the PC's and any potential successors isn't some European conservative party. It's Congress of the People and United Democratic Movement in South Africa.

Why?

COPE and UDM attracted the support of very online, often white, upper middle class types who didn't like the ANC's corruption and who found the DA too right wing, but all their actual supporters were impoverished Eastern Cape Xhosas

Likewise, the PC's or a potential successor will attract the support of online types who like the fiscal con-social prog approach, but its actual support base will be a bunch of Nova Scotia lobstermen who are neither fiscally conservative, nor socially progressive and support the party for entirely different reasons.

[DC Al Fine]

The last poll I saw; Putin had an 18% favourable rating among Republicans. Let's not let dislike of the GOP/Tories cloud our analysis.

[DC Al Fine]

We have our first random bid

[DC Al Fine]

I just got an "I'm running" email from Lewis' campaign.

[DC Al Fine]

I have a question, how could Brown get to the final round without Charest flopping and Lewis/Poilievre underperforming?

If Brown's strength in signing up new members is all it's cracked up to be. He did get over 60% against Christine Elliott in the Ontario PC leadership despite always being seen as an underdog.

The point system and his geographic appeal might limit this though. The crucial question is: can Brown expand his turnout game beyond the golden horseshoe?

One issue for Brown is that last time he was running as a right wing so-connish challenger to Christine Elliott. He's burnt his bridges with the socons, and now he's runnig to the left of the frontrunner. I fully expect him to do well at signing up members but those are some significant headwinds.

[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

[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.

[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.

[DC Al Fine]

Charest says he won't change any of Canada's gun laws, including the Liberals' "assault-style" firearm ban...

I mean, I guess it's not the worst thing in the world to avoid the O'Toole mistake of running on one thing in the leadership and another in the general. Charest wants to be seen as a principled moderate, not a flip-flopper.

But...good luck winning the CPC leadership pal. Poilievre's been trying to paint Charest as a "Liberal" because he's a Quebec Liberal, which is a pretty disingenuous strategy - he's also pointed at Charest's record on guns and carbon pricing, which strengthens that argument. Now Charest is strengthening Poilievre's argument running on a policy that will infuriate a large chunk of the base, and is almost certainly opposed by the vast majority of Conservatives.

I can forgive the kids on Canadian Election Twitter for not remembering the 1990's, but a Tory who ran for re-election in 1993 should be aware of what can happen when the base gets pissed.

[DC Al Fine]

Charest says he won't change any of Canada's gun laws, including the Liberals' "assault-style" firearm ban...

I mean, I guess it's not the worst thing in the world to avoid the O'Toole mistake of running on one thing in the leadership and another in the general. Charest wants to be seen as a principled moderate, not a flip-flopper.

But...good luck winning the CPC leadership pal. Poilievre's been trying to paint Charest as a "Liberal" because he's a Quebec Liberal, which is a pretty disingenuous strategy - he's also pointed at Charest's record on guns and carbon pricing, which strengthens that argument. Now Charest is strengthening Poilievre's argument running on a policy that will infuriate a large chunk of the base, and is almost certainly opposed by the vast majority of Conservatives.

Probably won't work with base, but on guns and carbon tax, British Tories support ban on semi-automatics and carbon pricing so could make argument British Tories not GOP is model party should follow.  But much of base is enamoured with GOP even if most Canadians don't like that. 

In fact in Australia and UK, it was a Conservative government (Thatcher and Howard) who banned these and in New Zealand National Party supported the ban.  Still knowing base agree anything short of overturning ban won't be good enough.

UK Tories and Aussie Liberals aren't really relevant in this context. A lot of gun owners support the Conservatives, they won't appreciate a leadership candidate who supports the Liberal policy on this file.

Further to that point, Miles characterization of the base as "enamoured with the GOP" obscures the situation on the ground more than it clarifies it. Canada has the highest gun owership rate of any first world country besides America. It has four times as many civilian firearms per capita as Australia and nearly eight times as many as England and Wales!

Gun owners are a much larger constituency in Canada than Australia or Britain, so of course the Canadian Conservatives are going to be more anti-gun control than their Australian and British counterparts.

[DC Al Fine]

With it looking like a supply and confidence agreement between Liberals and NDP, wonder how that impacts Conservative leadership race?  Does mean they could push date back but doubt they will.  Probably just enrages base more so helps Poilievre, but also means by next election will have been 10 years of Liberals in office.  At same time I don't think Trudeau runs again and usually junior partners in coalitions tend to take a hit so that might hurt Tories since if NDP drops and much goes Liberal means need higher threshold to win.  At same time probably easier to win back many PPC voters.

I think the most significant effect that we can be sure of is time. Should the supply-and-confidence agreement hold for the whole term, the next leader will have three whole years to prepare for an election - the longest that any CPC leader has had.

My hunch is that this is good for the CPC in a roundabout way. Regardless of whether Poilievre or Charest/Brown win the leadership, a significant portion of the party will be bitterly unhappy. Three years gives time to either heal wounds and get those people back in the fold, sign up new members and appeal to new voters to make up for the ones lost, or both.

Honestly, I think everyone gets something out of this except the PPC and maybe the Bloc Quebecois.

[DC Al Fine]

Libertarian is a clunky word to describe what Poillievre is doing. It conjures up images of that guy who turned himself blue from eating sliver and Gary Johnson being booed for supporting drivers licenses. Besides "get the government out of _______" or "scrap the _______ tax" have been bog standard conservative talking points for decades. It's hardly a uniquely libertarian thing.

I'd work backwards from Laddicus' point: Poillievre is trying to appeal to young people, particularly younger men because he (or his staff) feel they have been underserved by other parties/factions and could be won over. Therefore he talks about making it easier to build homes, or use crypto because younger men like those things and they work with his existing political identity/base.

[DC Al Fine]

People are saying don't underestimate Poilievre and making predictions for something 3 years ago is a fool's game, but I'm trying to imagine how he can make major gains in the 905, the Lower Mainland, Quebec and Atlantic Canada.  I don't think there's a huge appetite for minimal government libertarianism in Canada.  Doing well in the Prairies and rural Ontario adds nothing to the CPC tally.  

I agree, it's certainly hard to imagine Poilievre as a change agent who can win over people who voted for Trudeau three times. His personal shortcomings aside, Patrick Brown is probably the most "natural" option to turn the GTA blue, especially this pivotal "Trudeau/Ford voter" bloc.

I think a reasonable case for Poilievre could be made, as follows:

1. The scheduled 2025 election will be exactly ten years after the Liberals entered power. By then, you'll most likely be dealing with a fatigued electorate looking for change - so the fundamental knowledge of Canadian politics that "governments don't get voted in, they get voted out" favours the Tories regardless. To boot, Poilievre would provide a stark contrast to Trudeau and Freeland, in much the same way Trudeau did to Harper, and Ford did to Wynne.

2. Poilievre isn't really an orthodox libertarian running as an unblemished Ayn Rand disciple, nor is he running as a kooky libertarian who thinks driver's licenses are fascism. In fact, he's not really a libertarian at all. His leaning into "small government/reduce bureaucracy" rhetoric is pretty consistent for Tories, even if he emphasizes it more. More than that, he's presenting his ideas as a solution to pocketbook issues, not a matter of ideological dogma. Poilievre argues that his policies are a solution to everyday challenges like inflation and housing, which might actually get people listening.

3. No matter how much or how little you appeal to swing voters, the base must be kept happy. They're your donors, your volunteers, your candidates, your caucus, and in the Tories' case, about one-thirds of the Canadian population. There are some in the Conservative base who dislike Poilievre, but as a recent Abacus poll shows, there are many more who dislike Charest. Compared to his strongest challenger, Poilievre is the least likely to deal with base atrophy - and not only does a divided party exude weakness and dry up the coffers, it forces the leader to run around putting out fires instead of building a campaign machine and taking on the current government.

This

I am once again begging Atlas to stop calling garden variety conservative talking points "libertarianism".

[DC Al Fine]

Poilievre's pry back the PPC vote strategy only exacerbates the map problem.  The Conservatives need to be much more competitive in Liberal-dominated metropolitan Canada to form government. 

I don't think Poilievre or his inside circle are naive enough to genuinely believe that this is all they need to do.

Again, I dispute these bizarre characterizations of Poillievre's campaign strategy.

The big message he's been pushing the past several days is basically "progressive gatekeepers are stopping homes from being built. I will remove the gatekeepers blocking new supply"

Heck a few days ago he tweeted:

"Highly skilled new Canadians want to earn bigger paycheques & do the jobs they're trained for. Remove gatekeepers that block them. Give Canada more doctors, engineers & skilled professionals."

Put it wherever you want on the political spectrum, but it's definitely not targeted at Bernier's voters in Portage-Lisgar or Timmins-James Bay.

[DC Al Fine]

I went to Leslyn Lewis's speech in Halifax tonight. She got a better turnout than I expected (and much better than Charest did when he came here). Was quite impressed.

Not at all related to her politics, but she's also much taller than I expected

[DC Al Fine]

Poillievre has garnered his first Quebec caucus endorsement; Pierre-Paul Hus

[DC Al Fine]

Tomorrow is the deadline to pay the registration fee and the candidates on the ballot are Baber, Brown, Charest, Lewis, and Poillievre.

Is anyone else close to getting on the ballot?