Pierre Poilievre has earned the right to remain leader of the Conservative party.
There were no calls coming from inside the federal tent for him to depart after failing to displace the Liberal government in Monday’s election. In his concession speech, Poilievre himself made it clear he had
, nor should he.
Though he lost his seat, Prime Minister Mark Carney said Friday that he would call a byelection “as soon as possible,” once there is a vacant seat Poilievre can run for. And, as it happens, MP Damien Kurek is stepping aside for his leader, the party announced, also on Friday. The Conservatives won the rural Alberta riding of Battle River—Crowfoot by 82 per cent on Monday, indicating Poilievre should be back in the House in short order as leader, where he belongs.
The most prominent voices that were calling for him to leave are partisan Liberals. All conservatives in Canada, party members or not, should never, ever take advice from active Liberals and progressive activists. It is the equivalent of sticking a hand in an alligator’s mouth.
No matter how much they try to frame their advice as well-intentioned or constructive, the Canadian left views most conservatives as zoo animals, and their only goal is to win.
If Conservatives can learn anything from Liberals, it is by observing how they operate during elections. On the other hand, the flood of false counsel spewing from
on National Newswatch,
, and elsewhere calling for Poilievre to resign can be ignored.
It is only fitting that the Conservative party and those who voted for them should take some time to wallow, but that should be kept brief, and their eyes must still look towards the future. Contrary to the prevalent narratives, Poilievre has fundamentally transformed the party in a way that will pay great dividends down the line.
It won the
and established itself in general as the first choice of young voters, winning
in cities like London, while driving huge inroads through blue-collar communities to
industrial regions like Windsor. The Conservative breakthrough in Ontario, especially in the
, bodes well for the future.
This was all accomplished under Poilievre’s leadership, and it enabled them to hold the Liberals to a minority and attain the largest share of the popular vote in party history. A fourth consecutive defeat to the Liberals is still a deeply demoralizing blow, but turfing Poilievre and tearing down the house would be a terrible reaction.
Much of the criticism directed at Poilievre, again mostly from people who despise him, says that the loss of his own Carleton seat to Liberal challenger Bruce Fanjoy is sufficient reason for him to leave. This is nonsense.
The Ottawa-area riding of Carleton was not safe for Conservatives in the same way that Harper’s former seat of Calgary Heritage is. It is located in a region with thousands of Liberal-leaning public servants and progressive voters.
Prior to becoming leader, Poilievre had to put in serious legwork to
in the past, such as in 2015 where he won it by just three per cent.
This time around, the time Poilievre usually would have spent door knocking and shaking hands in Carleton was spent on a whirlwind rally tour that galvanized the Conservative campaign and halted the Liberal majority.
Again, the Conservatives expected to win this campaign, and shortening Carney’s seat count is not a victory, but this is still Poilievre’s party, and a survey by Abacus Data found that far more Canadians
partisan Conservatives than they do Liberals.
One of the silly narratives being spun is that Poilievre “blew” a 27-point lead.
At the peak of its popularity around Christmas, the Conservative party polled at 46 per cent. On Monday, their vote share was 41 percent. The decisive factor was the
of the NDP vote, not the Conservative one.
Since the modern party was formed in 2003, the only Conservative leaders to get the party close to a majority, or outright win one, have been Stephen Harper and Pierre Poilievre, both of whom were vilified by the progressive media and pundits who pretended they had the party’s best interest at heart.
Poilievre has remade the Conservative coalition into what it is, a party of strivers, young people, and battlers, to borrow a term from Australian political lingo.
A study should be conducted into how many of the ridings in exurban areas or smaller cities that went Conservative are full of newly arrived families from the bigger cities, who fled there in search of affordability.
The cost of living crisis will outlast the shock of the second Trump presidency, the opening months of which scared many Canadians out of voting for change in favour of Carney and the stability he projected. Carney’s base is ideologically disparate, being drawn from across the political spectrum into a circumstantial alliance.
There are NDP supporters, Liberal loyalists, pro-business types, and boomers, few of whom would normally share a room.
Those who have read the Life of Pi should compare it to the passage where a lion, a zebra, a hyena, and an orangutan find themselves together in a lifeboat after a storm sinks the ship they were being transported upon. After briefly co-existing in a crisis, they promptly break ranks and eat each other.
After the pain of losing this election, the Conservatives have work to do by mending fences or building fresh relationships, not to mention finding another seat for Poilievre, but a leadership race is out of the question. The Conservative party is his party until he says otherwise.
National Post
