This Conservative leadership race turned out to be a lot more fun than the one won by Andrew Sheare and Erin O’Toole. The candidates for the “last six” have already been identified and the three debates that will take place this month will be crucial in deciding the outcome.
One of the fascinating aspects of the current race is its pace. It was ruthless, and the average voter can’t help but notice that he actually has some bold ideas.
Pierre Poalievre really does not believe that bitcoin can replace the Canadian dollar. But he seems willing to use the Governor of the Bank of Canada as a whip boy. Typh MacLeam was appointed Trudeau. What other proof do you need that he is also responsible for Justin Flaction?
Poilievre is a jubilant arsonist who throws Molotov cocktails on piles of dry ideas and can’t wait to wait around to see the result. As his opponents try to answer his last, he moves on.
Say what you want for Poilievre, he has assembled a team for the campaign, which shows that he has the eye of a good manager. They imposed discipline in his messages, which remained short and striking. He will not give interviews. Why would he give them that chance? He is the presenter.
ACCESSIBILITY AS A TOPIC
Poilievre rides a large white horse made of “freedom”, resentment and stupidity. This is a sight, but watch out for the stool.
Studies showing that young liberals and the NDP support Poilievre must give rise to these parties. “Accessibility” as a topic was once the saving force of the NDP. Since his first election as Liberal leader in 2015, Trudeau has promised nausea to help “the middle class and those who work hard to join the middle class.” Poilievre stole this topic right under his nose.
Millennials know that they are the first generation of Canadians to have fewer than their parents or grandparents. Poilievre understood this.
These are young people who are very interested in climate change and social justice. They are very progressive on issues such as diversity and gender. They know which side they are on. But they do not see anyone on their side economically. Poliever at least makes them listen for now.
The environmental movement, demoralized by the spectacular sales of former superhero environment minister Stephen Gilbo, is an unexpected boon for Poalievre. How could it be worse? Who will give him a lecture on his promise to build more pipelines?
Jean Charest had to swallow whole to try. The carbon tax he paid (and bragged about) while the Quebec prime minister was out of the table because his focus groups and Polyever’s success told him it was a bad idea now.
Poilievre stands in front of a crumbling hut, lamenting its ridiculously high price and hinting that porters (his favorite word for government and the media) are responsible for the lack of affordable housing. He goes viral and his younger audience feels they understand him.
We must simply forget that the federal government has no say in agricultural land reserves around major cities in British Columbia or Quebec. Poilievre sounds angry and that seems to be enough for now.
He has mastered the fine art of saying the opposite. Regarding Quebec’s discriminatory bill 21, he said he did not like it, but was careful not to provide a video saying he would challenge it in court.
He recently recruited Quebec MP Pierre Paul-Huss into his campaign. When Paul-Huss spoke about this, he was upset that Charest questioned Bill 21. Then it is strange that he will support Poalievre. Once again, that doesn’t really matter. The videos were for an audience in Quebec and the glaring controversy was swept under the rug.
Many Conservative MPs oppose Bill 21. This will come to the fore during the debate, because only Patrick Brown has consistently opposed this law, which openly discriminates against religious minorities in general and Muslim women in particular.
There will not be much time for detail in these debates. The prepared lines, as usual, will take the place of the argument on the merits. Follow Charest, he is quick in the debate and very disciplined in terms of preparation. This is his three-point shot at the buzzer. He moves badly and knows it, so he will come with a lot of ammunition and fire to everything that moves.
Poilievre does not stoop when it comes to destroying other candidates. He called Brown a liar at the beginning of the campaign. He will not be ashamed to present a very long list of ethical shortcomings of the Charest regime in Quebec City. Expect him to make fun of Charest’s huaua (yes, he was a lawyer for this big Chinese company, but … he worked to free Michael).
Of course, Pierre Poalever’s “freedom” includes support trucks that have turned life into hell for the people of Ottawa. They also said they would not leave until the government resigned. So much for lecturing others on the principles of democracy.
When Harper puts him at the forefront of electoral reform, his proposals would make it difficult for Canadians to vote on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder. His experience in respecting the rights of the less fortunate is weak. Like Trump, he could not give a damn about the working class, but he knows how to vent their anger.
There is a belief that with a name like Pierre, Poilievre must have some traction in the province of La Belle. The reality is that he is facing Francois Lego on issues such as Bill 21 and the oil and gas pipelines.
Lego has said a resounding no to the Énergie Saguenay liquefied natural gas terminal and every new pipeline in Quebec. He says it is based on “social acceptability” (read: political risk).
“THE PIZZA OF POLYEVRE”
Other candidates are likely to oppose Quebec’s claim that it could unilaterally amend the BNA Act to reduce the language equality of English and French in court. Poilievre has no answer for this and will probably hide. This is a livewire problem that requires a fine, detailed understanding of language issues and the constitution.
This is the type of case in which the average Canadian may begin to notice that Pierre is not doing well. In fact, he does not go into details. This, more than noise, is Trump’s side with Poilievre: a slight shrug and nothing to give up.
Charest’s business argument with the Conservatives is: if you hope to win an election, choose me. After all, he is experienced and worldly. Exactly what Harper’s loyalists obviously don’t want right now!
Poilievre’s point is: the pattern of all of them and of all their houses. I will burn them down and build new affordable homes in their place.
What a race.
Tom Mulcare was the leader of the Federal New Democratic Party of Canada between 2012 and 2017.
Add Comment